4.5 Review

Steam explosion and its combinatorial pretreatment refining technology of plant biomass to bio-based products

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 10, 期 6, 页码 866-885

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/biot.201400705

关键词

Biofuels; Biorefinery; Combinatorial pretreatment; Plant biomass; Steam explosion

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program (863 Program) [2012AA021302]
  2. Open Funding Project of the National Key Laboratory of Biochemical Engineering [2013KF-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pretreatment is a key unit operation affecting the refinery efficiency of plant biomass. However, the poor efficiency of pretreatment and the lack of basic theory are the main challenges to the industrial implementation of the plant biomass refinery. The purpose of this work is to review steam explosion and its combinatorial pretreatment as a means of overcoming the intrinsic characteristics of plant biomass, including recalcitrance, heterogeneity, multi-composition, and diversity. The main advantages of the selective use of steam explosion and other combinatorial pretreatments across the diversity of raw materials are introduced. Combinatorial pretreatment integrated with other unit operations is proposed as a means to exploit the high-efficiency production of bio-based products from plant biomass. Finally, several pilot- and demonstration-scale operations of the plant biomass refinery are described. Based on the principle of selective function and structure fractionation, and multi-level and directional composition conversion, an integrated process with the combinatorial pretreatments of steam explosion and other pretreatments as the core should be feasible and conform to the plant biomass refinery concept. Combinatorial pretreatments of steam explosion and other pretreatments should be further exploited based on the type and intrinsic characteristics of the plant biomass used, the bio-based products to be made, and the complementarity of the processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据